State Sen. Greg Ball didn't specify what brand of torture he'd prefer to see enacted on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the suspected Boston Marathon bomber, when he tweeted out just after the 19-year-old's arrest, "So, scum bag #2 in custody. Who wouldn't use torture on this punk to save more lives?"

Ball didn't write that he'd like to see Tsarnaev waterboarded or subjected to stress positions or any of the other modern euphemisms that fall under the umbrella of "enhanced interrogation."

No, he came right out and used the T-word.

So excuse me for a moment while I get out my dental instruments and belt sander. Or perhaps the right honorable gentleman from Putnam County would prefer something in a more classical mode? Bamboo shoots under the fingernails? The car battery and the jumper cables?

Or, to swipe a memorable bit of nastiness from Orwell, the hungry rat in a cage strapped to Scum Bag No. 2's face?

Responding to criticism of his tweet, Ball issued a statement two days later that included this nugget of philosophy: "Terrorists play by a different set of rules by manipulating the greatest strengths of our open society against us. One of the questions to be asked is this: Is 'torture' ever justified in the war against terror, if it can save lives? I am not shy in joining those who say yes, and I believe we must give those tasked with protecting us every constitutional and effective tool to do so."

I was under the impression that terrorists don't play by any set of rules. Isn't that what sets them apart from those of us living under, y'know, the rule of law and all?

I'm equally unclear as to what Ball's referring to as "the greatest strengths of our open society," but I'd wager that he isn't referring to the Fifth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment and our nation's historic repudiation of torture —or as Ball daintily renders it this time around, "torture."

On Monday, Ball began taking a very different line. Instead of talking about torture as a worthwhile policy that we should explore, the senator tried to portray his tweet as merely an expression of his personal desire as "a red-blooded American" — a phrase Ball fairly wore out during his many media appearances.

"I would be first in line" to torture a terror suspect, he told Fox News, conjuring up the image of the strapping lawmaker hopping into place like a boy who has just been told there are only a few more free hot dogs to be handed out.

In a stormy appearance that evening on CNN with Piers Morgan, Ball expanded on his fantasy. "What I'm saying is that, as an individual, if given the opportunity with somebody like Osama bin Laden, it would be me, Osama bin Laden and a baseball bat," he said just moments after poking fun of Morgan's British accent. "And yes, I would use torture — as a person."

Well, that's very edifying. I'm going to bear that in mind the next time law enforcement or military authorities begin allowing Louisville Slugger-wielding individuals into the holding cells of high-value terror suspects.

Sigh. It would be nice to be able to write off Ball, whose career in the Legislature has been punctuated by episodes of high comedy and low logic. But his thoughts on what we should do with a baseball bat and a suspect who has not yet even appeared before a judge are of special import. That's because he is the chairman of the Senate's Homeland Security Committee — an arrangement brought to you in part by the Independent Democratic Conference, which in forging its coalition with Ball's Republican colleagues allowed him and almost every other GOP incumbent to hang on to their committee chairmanships.

The IDC's Sen. Diane Savino told me that Ball's torture tweet didn't surprise her, considering that such expressions were part of — she paused — "I don't want to say his charm, but his schtick." She had served on Homeland Security in the previous session, and praised his work ethic.

Here's another line Ball that retailed numerous times last week, as an indication of what a straight shooter he is: "A lotta politicians are fulla crap."